Drivers of silver-colored cars, according to the report, have a 50% less chance of being involved in an injury-causing accident than do drivers of white cars!

FUCK I DRIVE A WHITE CAR, WHAT DO I DO SHIT DAMN FUCK

But during economic boom times, brighter colors are more popular. Is all I'm saying. And auto makers know that during a recession, brighter colors won't sell, so they start making fewer of them when an economic downturn approaches.

Do you have data that shows people will preferentially choose more drab colors in times of economic scarcity given that both are equally available? I'm not disputing the phenomenon, but I think the cause and effect may be the opposite of what you posit; car companies know that brighter colors normally have less broad appeal than drab ones, and phase them out in cost-cutting measures (not that the brighter color cars cost more to produce, but it would save money to cut down on the number of colors produced total) to focus on only the safer, more widely marketable colors. This leads to fewer new bright cars on the market, and consumers who would normally want the brighter cars settle for the dull colors. I'm not saying I know this to be the case, but from the given information, it seems to be another reasonable explanation.

By "the opposite of what you posit" I assume you mean "I am utterly illiterate" because you seem to think I said something other than "people tend to buy drab cars in a recession" and "manufacturers offer more drab colors prior to and during a recession"

You fucking complete retard.

Quote

But during economic boom times, brighter colors are more popular. Is all I'm saying. And auto makers know that during a recession, brighter colors won't sell, so they start making fewer of them when an economic downturn approaches

You suggest a cause/effect relationship in your post, that car companies think people won't want to buy bright cars in a recession, and so make less of them. You give a particular reasoning for their decision; I suggested an alternative reasoning for the same decision.

Really? Your reasoning is essentially exactly the same, and you are stupid for thinking otherwise.

Please explain to me how "they will sell fewer brightly-colored cars" is different from "they will mostly sell safe bland colors".

You state that they believe bright colors sell less in a recession, so they stop making them. This is not the same as stopping making bright colors because it is cheaper to make fewer colors of car, and brighter colors are less widely appealing than more neutral colors to begin with. Essentially, your statement is: Because bright colors sell less in a recession, car companies stop producing them. Mine is: Because car companies want to cut costs in a recession, they stop making their niche products, which results in even fewer of these colors sold in recessions. Or, more simply: Because car companies start producing fewer bright colored cars in a recession, there are less bright colored cars sold. I'm sorry if I was unclear, but these are not equivalent chains of cause-effect.

Drivers of silver-colored cars, according to the report, have a 50% less chance of being involved in an injury-causing accident than do drivers of white cars!

FUCK I DRIVE A WHITE CAR, WHAT DO I DO SHIT DAMN FUCK

But during economic boom times, brighter colors are more popular. Is all I'm saying. And auto makers know that during a recession, brighter colors won't sell, so they start making fewer of them when an economic downturn approaches.

Do you have data that shows people will preferentially choose more drab colors in times of economic scarcity given that both are equally available? I'm not disputing the phenomenon, but I think the cause and effect may be the opposite of what you posit; car companies know that brighter colors normally have less broad appeal than drab ones, and phase them out in cost-cutting measures (not that the brighter color cars cost more to produce, but it would save money to cut down on the number of colors produced total) to focus on only the safer, more widely marketable colors. This leads to fewer new bright cars on the market, and consumers who would normally want the brighter cars settle for the dull colors. I'm not saying I know this to be the case, but from the given information, it seems to be another reasonable explanation.

By "the opposite of what you posit" I assume you mean "I am utterly illiterate" because you seem to think I said something other than "people tend to buy drab cars in a recession" and "manufacturers offer more drab colors prior to and during a recession"

You fucking complete retard.

Quote

But during economic boom times, brighter colors are more popular. Is all I'm saying. And auto makers know that during a recession, brighter colors won't sell, so they start making fewer of them when an economic downturn approaches

You suggest a cause/effect relationship in your post, that car companies think people won't want to buy bright cars in a recession, and so make less of them. You give a particular reasoning for their decision; I suggested an alternative reasoning for the same decision.

Drivers of silver-colored cars, according to the report, have a 50% less chance of being involved in an injury-causing accident than do drivers of white cars!

FUCK I DRIVE A WHITE CAR, WHAT DO I DO SHIT DAMN FUCK

But during economic boom times, brighter colors are more popular. Is all I'm saying. And auto makers know that during a recession, brighter colors won't sell, so they start making fewer of them when an economic downturn approaches.

Do you have data that shows people will preferentially choose more drab colors in times of economic scarcity given that both are equally available? I'm not disputing the phenomenon, but I think the cause and effect may be the opposite of what you posit; car companies know that brighter colors normally have less broad appeal than drab ones, and phase them out in cost-cutting measures (not that the brighter color cars cost more to produce, but it would save money to cut down on the number of colors produced total) to focus on only the safer, more widely marketable colors. This leads to fewer new bright cars on the market, and consumers who would normally want the brighter cars settle for the dull colors. I'm not saying I know this to be the case, but from the given information, it seems to be another reasonable explanation.

I call token concessions made once external factors (cops and cold) have done their part in the demoralization of protesters, effectively defusing the movement with minimal loss to bankers and politicians.